I edited your question to include the whole title within it, from which the phrase is (I think) obviously correct. Verb "are" is used with plural bleach and fish; what may be singular or plural.
–
jwpat7Apr 16 '12 at 19:53

2

from which the phrase is (I think) obviously correct. Is it? From my logic the verb "is" is relating to the subject "what", which is singular. How can it be plural? Something are wrong with XYZ sounds really wrong to me.
–
atticaeApr 16 '12 at 19:57

"the bleacn and the fish" is the object of "with", not the subject of "are". So this sentence is (it seems to me) incorrect. You could say: "What are the things wrong with ..."
–
GEdgarApr 16 '12 at 20:24

'What' in itself is neither singular nor plural; it does not change. 'Something are wrong' is odd because something -some thing -is singular. And your formulation is subtly different from the example : XYZ would normally be assumed to be one thing (which does indeed take a singular verb), whereas the bleach and the fish are (see what I mean?) two different things.
–
TimLymingtonApr 16 '12 at 20:25

4

@Rory Alsop: No disrespect, but I rejected your edit to the title. In the circumstances, it seems reasonable/amusing to me for OP to use the questionable "what are" there as well.
–
FumbleFingersApr 16 '12 at 20:35

Edit: Kudos to JLG for highlighting the importance of the word wrong in this construction. The interrogative pronounwhat attaches to wrong — a non-count abstract noun which transfers its non-count status to what. That doesn't happen with, for example, "What are those things?".

Why would you think that 'what' is non-count because of this example? 'What' doesn't get filled in by XYZ. 'What' is a kind of wrong not a kind of XYZ. 'What -are- wrongs made by XYZ?' is grammatical because the verb agrees with 'wrongs'.
–
MitchApr 16 '12 at 21:50

@Mitch: I don't follow you. 'What are wrongs made by XYZ?' sounds like a bad translation. I stand by my assertion that "what" in this usage is a "non-count pronoun". Thus, since non-count nouns always take the singular verb form, OP's version is grammatically incorrect. If you think "What are wrong with X [Y and Z]" can ever be valid then please post an answer defending it, and see if you can get anyone else to agree - I certainly won't.
–
FumbleFingersApr 16 '12 at 22:02

1

@FumbleFingers: I don't think "what are wrong with X,Y,and Z" is correct at all. But I disagreed with your analysis. My sentence, on reflection, is both bad and doesn't point to the right analysis either. Whatever is going on, the phrase 'with XYZ' is disposable and so the number of XYZ cannot have anything to do with the number on the verb.
–
MitchApr 17 '12 at 1:32

@Mitch: Isn't "whatever is going on" the fact that the word wrong is thrown in there? "What is wrong..." is correct; "What are wrong..." is incorrect. It doesn't matter whether the object of the preposition "with" is plural or singular.
–
JLGApr 17 '12 at 2:09

As a pronoun, what derives its number from the noun it replaces. In our sentence ('What is/are wrong with X, Y and Z?') it is not clear whether what replaces thing or things (or any number of other singular/plural nouns).

I would offer that is provides a more natural construction and is thus to be preferred: 'What is wrong with X, Y and Z?'

In my brief research, I was not able to find a conclusive answer based on grammaticality, though I am somewhat swayed by the comments by @JLG (about the non-count status of wrong).

Pocket Fowler's Modern English Usage says this:

singularwhat.

A problem of singular or plural verb agreement arises when what is
singular but looks forward to a plural noun or pronoun later in the
sentence: What we need is/are clear guidelines. Fowler had a useful
rule that if the sentence begins in the singular (i.e. if the initial
what is singular), the continuation should also be singular; so the
example just given would be expressed in the form What we need is
clear guidelines. In current use this rule is often respected, as the
following examples show:

"What really worries me is the numbers—Nina Bawden, 1987"

"What bothered him was drivers who switched lanes without signalling—New Yorker, 1989."

In these cases, it is arguable that a noun phrase such as the
circumstance of or the fact of should be understood after the main
verb; it is not the numbers or the drivers as such that cause the
worry in the first example or the bother in the second, but the fact
of what they represented or were doing. There are, however, counter
examples to be found:

"What concerns me are the number of construction projects that are delayed—York Press, 2004 [OEC]."

pluralwhat.

A different situation arises when what is plural: I have few books,
and what there are do not help me. In this sentence, what refers back
to books, and so its plural status is clear. When what refers forward,
the choice is less obvious: We seem to have abandoned what seem/seems
to us to be the most valuable parts of our Constitution. Fowler (whose
example this is) had another useful rule in these cases: if what can
be resolved into the—s that, with—s standing for a plural noun that
comes later in the sentence, the construction should be plural. In the
example just given, what…can be resolved into the parts of our
Constitution that…, and the continuation should therefore be seem
(plural), not seems. If the relative clause introduced by what comes
at the head of the sentence, the same rule can be followed if what can
be resolved into that which: What [= that which] is required is faith
and confidence, and willingness to work. This principle is much less
secure, however, since what in the example given (Fowler's again) can
as easily be resolved as the things which (plural): What [= the things
which] are required are faith and confidence, and willingness to work.
Here there is clearly a choice, and naturalness and rhythm will often
be decisive; the important point is that the choice between singular
and plural should be consistent throughout the sentence, and that a
singular what should not be followed by a plural continuation: ☒ What
is required are faith and confidence, and willingness to work.

"What" can be either singular or plural. "is/are" is a linking verb, so the number of the things on either side -- the subject and the predicate nominative -- should match, and then this number should match the verb.

So, for example, we say, "What IS the name of your friend?" because "name" is singular, so "what" is being used as a singular, so the verb should be singular. But we say, "What ARE the names of your friends?" because "names" is plural, etc.

In this case we have a predicate adjective rather than a predicate nominative. I think in such cases the subject "what" is always considered singular. I'm trying to think of exceptions. So in "What is/are wrong with X, Y, and Z", we should use "is". I guess you are being thrown off by the prepositional phrase "with X, Y, and Z". But such a phrase does not affect the number of the subject. A simple rule of thumb is, when trying to determine things about the subject and verb, just ignore any "extra detail" phrases.

If that doesn't make sense to your intuition, consider this sentence, "Who is/are the policeman who arrested Smith and Jones?" Clearly it should be "is", because "policeman" is singular -- we are asking for one policeman. The fact that "Smith and Jones" are two people is irrelevant. They're not the "who" here: "the policeman" is.

In the same way, the thing you are asking about in your sentence is "wrong". The fact that it is "with X, Y, and Z" has nothing to do with the number of the subject.